복수초속 복수초절 식물 12종 1변종과 4종의 외군을 대상으로 복수초절 내 분류체계의 타당성을 검증하고 각 분류군 간의 유연관계를 규명하기 위하여 ITS염기서열에 기초한 계통분류학적 연구를 수행하였다. 계통수 제작 결과 분석에 포함된 복수초(A. amurensis Regel et Radde) 7개체 중 일본에서 채집된 2개체가 일본 고유종인 가지복수초(A. ramosa Franch.)와 더 가까운 유연관계를 보였다. 이는 복수초가 단계통군이 아님을 말해주며, A. amurensis의 분류학적 정체성에 대한 재검토가 필요함을 암시한다. 국내에서 흔히 가지복수초로 동정되고 있는 개복수초(A. pseudoamurensis W. T. Wang)는 계통수 상에서 독자적인 그룹을 이루는 것으로 확인되었고, 따라서 개복수초를 가지복수초와 같은 종으로 보는 견해를 뒷받침하지 않았다. A. shikokuensis Nishikawa et Koji Ito, 세복수초(A. multiflora Nishikawa et Koji Ito), 및 개복수초를 대표하여 분석에 포함된 개체들은 하나의 분기군(clade)을 이루었으나 각 종은 계통수 상에서 명확히 구분되지 않았다. 본 연구 결과 ser. Amurenses와 ser. Coeruleae가 다계통군을 이루거나 측계통군을 이루는 것으로 확인되었으며, 따라서 복수초절을 4개의 열(series)로 분류한 Wang의 분류체계는 타당하지 않은 것으로 밝혀졌다.
복수초속 복수초절 식물 12종 1변종과 4종의 외군을 대상으로 복수초절 내 분류체계의 타당성을 검증하고 각 분류군 간의 유연관계를 규명하기 위하여 ITS 염기서열에 기초한 계통분류학적 연구를 수행하였다. 계통수 제작 결과 분석에 포함된 복수초(A. amurensis Regel et Radde) 7개체 중 일본에서 채집된 2개체가 일본 고유종인 가지복수초(A. ramosa Franch.)와 더 가까운 유연관계를 보였다. 이는 복수초가 단계통군이 아님을 말해주며, A. amurensis의 분류학적 정체성에 대한 재검토가 필요함을 암시한다. 국내에서 흔히 가지복수초로 동정되고 있는 개복수초(A. pseudoamurensis W. T. Wang)는 계통수 상에서 독자적인 그룹을 이루는 것으로 확인되었고, 따라서 개복수초를 가지복수초와 같은 종으로 보는 견해를 뒷받침하지 않았다. A. shikokuensis Nishikawa et Koji Ito, 세복수초(A. multiflora Nishikawa et Koji Ito), 및 개복수초를 대표하여 분석에 포함된 개체들은 하나의 분기군(clade)을 이루었으나 각 종은 계통수 상에서 명확히 구분되지 않았다. 본 연구 결과 ser. Amurenses와 ser. Coeruleae가 다계통군을 이루거나 측계통군을 이루는 것으로 확인되었으며, 따라서 복수초절을 4개의 열(series)로 분류한 Wang의 분류체계는 타당하지 않은 것으로 밝혀졌다.
DNA sequences of nrITS regions obtained from 49 accessions representing 12 species and one variety within the section Adonanthe of the genus Adonis were analyzed to test the previous intra-sectional classification system and to determine their phylogenetic relationships. The results showed that the ...
DNA sequences of nrITS regions obtained from 49 accessions representing 12 species and one variety within the section Adonanthe of the genus Adonis were analyzed to test the previous intra-sectional classification system and to determine their phylogenetic relationships. The results showed that the seven accessions of A. amurensis Regel et Radde included in the present study did not form a monophyletic group, as some of the accessions showed a close relationship with the Japanese endemic species A. ramosa Franch., which implies that the current species delimitation and identification of A. amurensis is problematic. Adonis pseudoamurensis W. T. Wang, which is frequently misidentified as A. ramosa in Korea, formed a segregated group, which suggests that they should not be considered as conspecific taxa. Accessions from A. shikokuensis Nishikawa et Koji Ito, A. multiflora Nishikawa et Koji Ito, and A. pseudoamurensis formed a clade, but monophyly of each species was not evident. The nrITS data did not support the classification system proposed by Wang, who classified sect. Adonanthe into four series, as most of these were found to be either polyphyletic or paraphyletic.
DNA sequences of nrITS regions obtained from 49 accessions representing 12 species and one variety within the section Adonanthe of the genus Adonis were analyzed to test the previous intra-sectional classification system and to determine their phylogenetic relationships. The results showed that the seven accessions of A. amurensis Regel et Radde included in the present study did not form a monophyletic group, as some of the accessions showed a close relationship with the Japanese endemic species A. ramosa Franch., which implies that the current species delimitation and identification of A. amurensis is problematic. Adonis pseudoamurensis W. T. Wang, which is frequently misidentified as A. ramosa in Korea, formed a segregated group, which suggests that they should not be considered as conspecific taxa. Accessions from A. shikokuensis Nishikawa et Koji Ito, A. multiflora Nishikawa et Koji Ito, and A. pseudoamurensis formed a clade, but monophyly of each species was not evident. The nrITS data did not support the classification system proposed by Wang, who classified sect. Adonanthe into four series, as most of these were found to be either polyphyletic or paraphyletic.
* AI 자동 식별 결과로 적합하지 않은 문장이 있을 수 있으니, 이용에 유의하시기 바랍니다.
제안 방법
Thus, in the present study, we investigated the phylogenetic relationships of the sect. Adonanthe of genus Adonis L. using sequences from the ITS region of nuclear ribosomal DNA and aimed to evaluate the validity of the intra-genus classification system more objectively. In addition, we also attempted to address the taxa with species delimitation problems.
DNA sequences for each sample in both the forward and reverse orientations were assembled and aligned using Geneious ver. 7.1.7 (Biomatters, Ltd., Auckland, New Zealand), and final alignments were manually verified. Maximum Parsimony analysis (MP) and Maximum Likelihood (ML) were conducted using PAUP* ver.
0b10 (Swofford, 2003). Heuristic search was carried out with ACCTRAN, MULPARS, and TBR branch swapping options turned on. To determine the support levels for the resulting cladograms, the bootstrap values (Felsentein, 1985) and posterior probabilities (PP) from the Bayesian inference were determined.
Heuristic search was carried out with ACCTRAN, MULPARS, and TBR branch swapping options turned on. To determine the support levels for the resulting cladograms, the bootstrap values (Felsentein, 1985) and posterior probabilities (PP) from the Bayesian inference were determined. Bootstrap values were obtained from 1,000 bootstrap replicates.
데이터처리
To calculate the posterior probabilities using a Bayesian inference, a substitution model best fit to each set of sequence data was selected based on Akaike Information Criterion (AIC; Posada and Buckley, 2004) using Modeltest ver. 3.7 (Posada and Crandall, 1998).
성능/효과
99. A subclade composed of A. amurensis and A. ramosa within clade IV formed a sister group with a subclade composed of A. pseudoamurensis, A. multiflora, and A. shikokuensis with a bootstrap value of 63% and a Bayesian posterior probabilities value of 0.99.
Adonanthe have similar morphological characters with severe variations, which hindered establishment of dependable taxonomic characters within the section. A. davidii and A. brevistyla formed a subclade with bootstrap value of 99% in the MP analysis (Fig. 2), which revealed that they are genetically related taxa. It is noticeable that BRE1 and BRE2 in A.
puberula was formed. A. vernalis (clade II) diverged with a 100% bootstrap value, and a clade III composed of A. bobroviana and A. sibirica diverged with a bootstrap value less than 50%. In addition, a subclade composed of A.
2). Additionally, the Sangumburi (MUL4) and Eorimok (MUL5) accessions were similar to A. shikokuensis that is distributed in Honshu, Shikoku, and Kyushu in Japan as well as to other groups (PSE4, PSE7, and PSE8) of the Korean A. pseudoamurensis (Figs. 2, 3, Table 1). This result suggest that A.
shikokuensis (Table 1). Also, two accessions (AMU6 and AMU7) of A. amurensis were located in the same subclade as A. ramosa, showing a genetically close relationship between these taxa.
amurensis (AMU1). Among the ingroups, A. davidii (DAV1) and A. amurensis (AMU3 and AMU5) were the taxa with the highest sequence divergence (6.106%).
Clade III composed of A. bobroviana and A. sibirica formed a sister group with clade IV composed of A. pseudoamurensis, A. multiflora, A. shikokuensis, A. amurensis, and A. ramosa with a bootstrap value of 92% and a Bayesian posterior probabilities value of 0.99.
106%). In the data set that included outgroups, taxa without intraspecific sequence variation included A. ramosa (RAM1, RAM3, RAM4, RAM5, RAM7, RAM8, and RAM11), A. amurensis (AMU6 and AMU7), A. shikokuensis (SHI1), A. pseudoamurensis (PSE4, PSE7, and PSE8), and A. multiflora (MUL4 and MUL5) (Table 1). The highest sequence divergence was observed between A.
Pairwise distance between taxa calculated using Kimura’s two parameter method revealed that sequence divergence of the ITS regions across 53 samples, including the outgroup, was 0− 9.873%; and sequence divergence among 49 samples, excluding the outgroup, was relatively high (0−6.106%).
The MP, NJ, and ML analyses of the ITS sequences distinguished A. ramosa from A. pseudoamurensis and revealed that A. multiflora was a distinct clade (Figs. 1−3).
후속연구
ramosa. However, further studies including more diverse samples and additional molecular markers are necessary to resolve the relationship among these taxa and obtain a reliable phylogenetic tree.
brevistyla have been considered either conspecific (Wang, 1980; Fu, 2000; Fu and Robinson, 2001) or treated as independent species (Wang, 1994a). Since it is possible that A. davidii was misidentified as BRE1 in the present study, a taxonomic study based on the original description and a type specimen should be performed to validate the identities of these taxa. Meanwhile, Wang (1994a, 1994b) suggested that A.
1), either the bootstrap value supporting the clade I was low or the taxa examined did not form a monophyletic group depending on the analysis method implemented. Thus, further studies are needed to resolve the phylogenetic relationships among these groups in relation to the evolutionary trends of morphological characters.
참고문헌 (55)
Alvarez, I. and J. F. Wendel. 2003. Ribosomal ITS sequences and plant phylogenetic inference. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 29: 417-434.
Baldwin, B. G. 1992. Phylogenetic utility of the internal transcribed spacers of nuclear ribosomal DNA in plants: an example from the Compositae. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 1: 3-16.
Bobrov, E. G. 1937. Adonis. In Flora of the U.S.S.R. Komarov, V.L. (ed), Koeltz Scientific Book, Koenigstein, Germany. 7: 403-411. (in Russian)
Cai, Y. F., S. W. Li, Y. Liu, S. Quan, M. Chen, Y. F. Xie, H. Z. Jiang, E. Z. Wei, N. W. Yin, L. Wang, R. Zhang, C. L. Huang, X. H. He and M. F. Jiang. 2009. Molecular phylogeny of Ranunculaceae based on internal transcribed spacer sequences. African Journal of Biotechnology 8: 5,215-5,224.
Cronquist, A. 1981. An Integrated System of Classification of Flowering Plants. Columbia Univ. Press, New York.
De Candolle, A. P. 1818. Adonis. In Regni Vegetabilis Systema Naturale. Vol. 1. De Candolle, A. P. (ed.), Sumptibus Sociorum Treuttel et Wurtz, Paris. Pp. 220-226.
Despres, L., L. Gielly, B. Redoutet and P. Taberlet. 2003. Using AFLP to resolve phylogenetic relationships in a morphologically diversified plant species complex when nuclear and chloroplast sequences fail to reveal variability. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 17: 185-196.
Farris, J. S., M. Kallersjo, A. G. Kiuge and C. Bult. 1995. Testing significance of incongruence. Cladistic 10: 315-319.
Felsentein, J. 1985. Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39: 783-791.
Franchet, A. 1885. Plantae Davidianae ex Sinarum imperio, Nouvelles Archives du Museum d'Histoire Naturelle. Paris. Ser. 2. 8: 183-254.
Franchet, A. 1894. Les Adonis vivaces et leur repartition geogaphique. Bulletin de la Societe Philomatique de Paris. Ser. 8. 6: 80-93.
Fu, D. and O. R. Robinson. 2001. Adonis. In Flora of China. Vol. 6 (Caryophyllaceae through Lardizabalaceae). Wu, Z. Y., P. H. Raven and D. Y. Hong (eds.), Science Press, Beijing, and Missouri Botanical Garden Press, St. Louis. Pp. 389-391.
Fu, K. 2000. Adonis L. In Flora of Loess-plateaus Sinicae. Northwestern Institute of Botany. 1: 457-459. (in Chinese)
Hastings, W. K. 1970. Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains and their applications. Biometrika 57: 97-109.
Hoot, S. B. 1995. Phylogeny of the Ranunculaceae based on preliminary atpB, rbcL and 18S nuclear ribosomal DNA sequence data. Plant Systematics and Evolution, Suppl. 9: 241-251.
Huelsenbeck, J. P. and F. Ronquist. 2001. MrBayes: Bayesian inference of phylogenetic trees. Bioinformatics 17: 754-755.
Johansson, J. T. 1999. There large inversions in the chloroplast genomes and one loss of the chloroplast gene rps16 suggest an early evolutionary split in the genus Adonis (Ranunculaceae). Plant Systematics and Evolution 218: 133-143.
Kaneko, S., N. Nakagoshi and Y. Isagi. 2008. Origin of the endangered tetraploid Adonis ramosa (Ranunculaceae) assessed with chloroplast and nuclear DNA sequence data. Acta Phytotaxonomica et Geobotanica 59: 165-174.
Kimura, M. 1980. A simple method for estimation evolutionary rates of base substitution through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences. Journal of Molecular Evolution 16: 111-120.
Lee, C. H., S. Lee, Y. B. Suh, S. H. Yeau and N. S. Lee. 2003. A morphological reexamination on the genus Adonis L. sensu lato (Ranunculaceae) in Korea. Korean Journal of Plant Taxonomy 33: 435-454. (in Korean)
Lee, Y. N. 2004. Adonis amurensis var. pseudoamurensis Y. N. Lee. Bulletin of Korea Plant Research Institute 4: 38.
Lee, Y. N. 2006. New Flora of Korea I. Kyohaksa, Seoul. (in Korean)
Linnaeus, C. 1753. Species Plantarum, vol. 1. Laurentius Salvius, Stockholm, 560 pp.
Mabberley, D. J. 1990. The Plant Book. Cambridge Univ. Press. New York.
Maximowicz, C. J. 1877. Diagnoses plantarum novarum asiaticarum. Bulletin de l'Academie Imperiale des Sciences de Saint-Petersbourg. St. Petersburg. 23: 305-391.
Meusel, H., E. Jaeger and E. Weinert. 1965. Vergleichende Chorologie der Zentraleuropaischen Flora. Stuttgart. G. Fischer.
Nishikawa, T. 1988. Botanical studies on Adonis amurensis Regel et Radde in Japan (Part 1). Journal of Hokkaido University of Education (Sect. IIB). 39(1): 1-35.
Nishikawa, T. 1989. Botanical studies on Adonis amurensis Regel et Radde in Japan (Part 2). Journal of Hokkaido University of Education (Sect. IIB). 39(2): 1-25.
Nishikawa, T. 1994. Phytogeographical study of Adonis (Ranunculaceae) in the Kushiro and Nemuro districts, Hokkaido. National Science Museum, Tokyo 27: 71-77. (in Japanese)
Nishikawa, T. and K. Ito. 2001. A new species of Adonis (Ranunculaceae) from Shikoku, western Japan. Bulletin of the National Science Museum, Tokyo Ser. B. 27: 79-83.
Nishikawa, T. and R. Takeshima. 1992. Geographical distribution of Adonis (Ranunculaceae) in the northern part of Hokkaido. National Science Museum, Tokyo 25: 87-96. (in Japanese)
Nishikawa, T. and Y. Kadota. 2006. Adonis. In Flora of Japan. Vol. IIa. Iwatsuki, K. et al. (eds.), Kodansha Ltd, Tokyo. Pp. 287-288.
Park, C. W. 2007. Adonis. In The Genera of Vascular Plants of Korea. Flora of Korea Editorial Committee (ed.), Academy Publishing Co., Seoul. Pp. 184-185.
Posada, A. D. and K. A. Crandall. 1998. Modeltest: Testing the model of DNA substitution. Bioinformatics 14: 817-818.
Posada, A. D. and T. R. Buckley. 2004. Model selection and model averaging in phylogenetics: advantage of Akaike Information Criterion and Bayesian approaches over likelihood ratio tests. Systematic Biology 53: 793-808.
Poschkurlat, A. P. 1997. Systema sections Consiligo DC. generis Adonis L. Novosti Sistematiki Vysshikh Rastenii Moscow & Leningrad [St. Petersburg] 14: 82-83.
Ren, Y., H. L. Chang, X. H. Tian, P. Song and P. K. Endress. 2009. Floral development in Adonideae (Ranunculaceae). Flora 204: 506-517.
Saitou, N. and M. Nei. 1987. The neighbor-joining method: a new for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Molecular Biology and Evolution 4: 406-425.
Son, D. C. 2011. A taxonomic study on the genus Adonis L. (Ranunculaceae) in Korea. Hannam University, Daejeon. (in thesis for M. Sc.)
Son, D. C. 2015. A systematic study on the section Adonanthe of genus Adonis L. (Ranunculaceae) in East Asia. Hannam University, Daejeon. (in thesis for D. Sc.)
Son, D. C. and S. C. Ko. 2011. Taxonomy of the infraspecific taxa of Adonis amurensis Regel et Radde (Ranunculaceae). Korean Journal of Plant Taxonomy 41: 144-155. (in Korean)
Son, D. C. and S. C. Ko. 2012. A taxonomic review of Adonis pseudoamurensis W. T. Wang (Ranunculaceae). Korean Journal of Plant Taxonomy 42: 316-323. (in Korean)
Son, D. C. and S. C. Ko. 2013. Aggregated achenes and achene morphology of the Korean Adonis L. and its related taxa in East Asia. Korean Journal of Plant Taxonomy 43: 312-318. (in Korean)
Spach, E. 1839. Histoire Naturelle des Vegetaux. Phanerogames 7. Paris: Librairie Encyclopedique de Roret Pp. 186-192.
Suh, Y., J. Lee, S. Lee, C. H. Lee, S. H. Yeau and N. S. Lee. 2002. Molecular evidence for the taxonomic identity of Korean Adonis (Ranunculaceae). Journal of Plant Research 115: 217-223.
Sun, H., W. Mclewin and M. F. Fay. 2001. Molecular phylogeny of Helleborus (Ranunculaceae), with an emphasis on the East Asian-Mediterranean disjunction. Taxon 50: 1,001-1,018.
Swofford, D. L. 2003. PAUP*: Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony(*and Other Methods), version 4.0b10. Sinauer Associates,Sunderland, Massachusetts.
Tamura, M. 1990. A new classification of the family Ranunculaceae 1. Acta Phytotaxonomica et Geobotanica 41: 93-101. (in Japanese)
Tamura, M. 1991. A new classification of the family Ranunculaceae 2. Acta Phytotaxonomica et Geobotanica 42: 177-187. (in Japanese)
Wang, L. A. and M. Y. Liu. 1988. Studies on the genus Adonis in northeast China. Bulletin of Botanical Research, Harbin 8: 49-53 (in Chinese).
Wang, W. T. 1980. Adonis. In Flora of Reipublicae Popularis Sinicae. Tomus 28. Angiospermae: Dicotyledoneae: Ranunculaceae (2), Ranunculoideae. Wang, W. T. (ed.), Agendae Academiae Sinicae Edita, Beijing. Pp. 246-255. (in Chinese)
Wang, W. T. 1994a. Revision of Adonis (Ranunculaceae) I. Bulletin of Botanical Research, Harbin 14: 1-31. (in Chinese)
Wang, W. T. 1994b. Revision of Adonis (Ranunculaceae) II. Bulletin of Botanical Research, Harbin 14: 105-138. (in Chinese)
Wang, W. T. 1998. Adonis. In Higher Plants of China. Vol. 3. Fu, L. and T. Hong (eds.), Qingdao Publishing House, Qingdao. Pp. 546-549. (in Chinese)
White, T. J., T. Bruns, S. Lee and J. Taylor. 1990. Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA genes for phylogenetics. In PCR protocols: A Guide to Methods and Applications, Innis, M., K. Gelfand, J. Sninsky and T. White (eds.), Academic Press, San Diego, California, USA. Pp. 315-322.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.